BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

2 results for “capital gains”+ Section 32(1)(ii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,660Delhi2,401Bangalore1,070Chennai708Ahmedabad612Kolkata543Jaipur482Hyderabad358Chandigarh281Karnataka254Pune232Indore220Surat218Cochin157Raipur132Rajkot89Agra83Cuttack77Nagpur72Visakhapatnam68Guwahati59Calcutta56SC56Panaji52Lucknow42Telangana41Amritsar36Dehradun26Ranchi13Jodhpur10Allahabad10Patna10Kerala9Varanasi8Rajasthan5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Andhra Pradesh2D.K. JAIN JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR1K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN A.K. SIKRI1Orissa1Punjab & Haryana1MADAN B. LOKUR S.A. BOBDE1ASHOK BHAN DALVEER BHANDARI1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 54G8

M/S FIBRE BOARDS (P) LTD BANGALOARE vs. CIT BANGALORE

C.A. No.-005525-005526 - 2005Supreme Court11 Aug 2015
Section 280YSection 280ZSection 54G

II) shows that Section 10(2)(xi) of the 1922 Act is equivalent to Sections 36(1)(vii), 36(2) and 41(4) of the 1961 Act. The repealed Section 10(2)(xi) is thus a composite section containing the ingredients of the re-enacted Sections 36(1)(vii), 36(2) and 41(4). Consequently when a debt is written

COMMNR.,CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, KERALA vs. M/S. LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD

Appeals are disposed of

C.A. No.-006770-006770 - 2004Supreme Court20 Aug 2015

II. This is for the reason that in our Constitutional scheme, taxation powers of the Centre and the States are mutually exclusive. There is no concurrent power of taxation. This being the case, the moment the levy contained in a taxing statute transgresses into a prohibited exclusive field, it is liable to be struck down. In the present case